This is the sort of event that is more likely to happen when planes are manufactured -- "for training purposes" -- while development is ongoing.
GAO in March: "We have reported on F-35 issues for many years. Over time we have reported significant cost, schedule, and performance problems and have found that those problems, in large part, can be traced to (1) decisions made at key junctures without adequate product knowledge; and (2) a highly concurrent acquisition strategy with significant overlap among development, testing, and manufacturing activities. We have made numerous recommendations aimed at addressing these issues, and DOD has taken action to address them to varying degrees."
And then there were the IG findings last year: "The F-35 program did not sufficiently implement or flow down technical and quality management system requirements to prevent the fielding of nonconforming hardware and software. This could adversely affect aircraft performance, reliability, maintainability, and ultimately program cost. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (Lockheed Martin) and its subcontractors did not follow disciplined AS9100 Quality Management System practices, as evidenced by 363 findings, which contained 719 issues."
So the program is similar to the plane: It's supposed to do many things and therefore doesn't do any of them well.
its worse than that. they lifted the grounding of this airplane prematurely. this is the result. they're lucky no one died.
this program is as good as dead. between out of control health costs that isn't solved by Obama care to the idea that money could be better spent elsewhere will see this Turkey die.
Well my point is that these fleets of eighty-plus, and growing, planes manufactured during a development program and used for "training missions" shouldn't be there in the first place because they are unproven, dangerous and un-certified.
So park 'em all and stop building them already. And for heavens' sakes if you are a foreign country don't buy any.
Then, of course, if they are there already (as they are) then do a proper complete inspection after any mishap.
This is the sort of event which frightens me on the B model, where they have "fueldraulic" -- fuel -- lines running aft to activate the ninety degree swivel nozzle. This sort of event in the air with fuel aft during a vertical landing would be horrendous.
"this program is as good as dead"??? I guess you had better look up the definition of dead Sol' since it is far from what most people would consider "dead". Maybe you should look up "growing" instead since that is what is happening.
I wonder, after this event, if they still plan to fly a dangerous, unproven, durability-limited and un-certified (in air-worthiness) F-35B across the pond, and then fly that dangerous, unproven and un-certified plane in UK airspace.
There must be a misunderstanding. There is no way that extremely and reliable engine could fail, no way. Probably is just another milestone that shows how amazingly manoeuvrable and safe for the pilot is this amazing airplane in case of fire.
Just one more plan coming together, anyone here know about the Strategic missile forces removing the MIRV warheads for single bomb warheads? No word on whether that single warhead will be a nuke or not. How about the under the covers removal of all US forces minefields in the Korean DMZ? The almost ratification of the anti mine rules which would take all mines off the US forces inventory, air scatter-able, land scatter-able and man em-placed. Obama is not just dropping the US guard he is making a first strike almost a certainty without any reprisal. Under these circumstances, what difference at this point does a burning F-35B make? Don't ya just love it when somebodies plan comes together so well?
Guess the fans won't be able to use the "At least it won't catch fire like the T-50" argument.
ReplyDeleteLet's see... Only 5 T-50s exist....
DeleteThat fire took out 1/5 of all T-50s in the world.
By contrast, the US military has 104 F35s...
This fire took out less than 1/100th of the total F35 fleet.
Hm. Here's the other way around for you:
DeleteThere's 104 planes that now need to be checked for engine and possible systemic problems vs four T-50's.
Let's suppose all F-35 and T-50 prototypes have engine problems... which side is better off fixing their fleet?
We can come to the conclusion that the best way to avoid mishap is to not fly any sorties, better yet just don't build anything at all to begin with.
DeleteThis is the sort of event that is more likely to happen when planes are manufactured -- "for training purposes" -- while development is ongoing.
ReplyDeleteGAO in March:
"We have reported on F-35 issues for many years. Over time we have reported significant cost, schedule, and performance problems and have found that those problems, in large part, can be traced to (1) decisions made at key junctures without adequate product knowledge; and (2) a highly concurrent acquisition strategy with significant overlap among development, testing, and manufacturing activities. We have made numerous recommendations aimed at addressing these issues, and DOD has taken action to address them to varying degrees."
And then there were the IG findings last year:
"The F-35 program did not sufficiently implement or flow down technical and quality management system requirements to prevent the fielding of nonconforming hardware and software. This could
adversely affect aircraft performance, reliability, maintainability, and
ultimately program cost. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (Lockheed Martin) and its subcontractors did not follow disciplined
AS9100 Quality Management System practices, as evidenced by 363 findings, which contained 719 issues."
So the program is similar to the plane: It's supposed to do many things and therefore doesn't do any of them well.
its worse than that. they lifted the grounding of this airplane prematurely. this is the result. they're lucky no one died.
Deletethis program is as good as dead. between out of control health costs that isn't solved by Obama care to the idea that money could be better spent elsewhere will see this Turkey die.
Well my point is that these fleets of eighty-plus, and growing, planes manufactured during a development program and used for "training missions" shouldn't be there in the first place because they are unproven, dangerous and un-certified.
DeleteSo park 'em all and stop building them already. And for heavens' sakes if you are a foreign country don't buy any.
Then, of course, if they are there already (as they are) then do a proper complete inspection after any mishap.
This is the sort of event which frightens me on the B model, where they have "fueldraulic" -- fuel -- lines running aft to activate the ninety degree swivel nozzle. This sort of event in the air with fuel aft during a vertical landing would be horrendous.
"this program is as good as dead"??? I guess you had better look up the definition of dead Sol' since it is far from what most people would consider "dead". Maybe you should look up "growing" instead since that is what is happening.
DeleteI wonder, after this event, if they still plan to fly a dangerous, unproven, durability-limited and un-certified (in air-worthiness) F-35B across the pond, and then fly that dangerous, unproven and un-certified plane in UK airspace.
ReplyDeleteGod save the Queen.
DeleteThere must be a misunderstanding. There is no way that extremely and reliable engine could fail, no way. Probably is just another milestone that shows how amazingly manoeuvrable and safe for the pilot is this amazing airplane in case of fire.
ReplyDeleteSigh, if you were alive during F14 testing, you would have had a heart attack
Delete1 week after first flight, a massive hydraulic failure destroys the prototype.
The shitty engines were nice enough to kill the USN's first female tomcat pilot.
Mary Lou Jorgensen? She was the first woman carrier qualified for the F-14 back in the 80's
DeleteJust one more plan coming together, anyone here know about the Strategic missile forces removing the MIRV warheads for single bomb warheads? No word on whether that single warhead will be a nuke or not.
ReplyDeleteHow about the under the covers removal of all US forces minefields in the Korean DMZ?
The almost ratification of the anti mine rules which would take all mines off the US forces inventory, air scatter-able, land scatter-able and man em-placed.
Obama is not just dropping the US guard he is making a first strike almost a certainty without any reprisal.
Under these circumstances, what difference at this point does a burning F-35B make?
Don't ya just love it when somebodies plan comes together so well?
Two engjnes, two lifes.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/kqMk1Mhgy1w
Leave it to a classy place like this to celebrate an aircraft fire.
ReplyDeleteNice post dear. Thanks for sharing it Thin Client Hardware & Citrix Thin Client
ReplyDelete